Re: [Keysters] Coming for Who? II

2002-10-5 02:22:00

I didn't miss your point JJ, I disagree with it. Rather important difference, don't you think? ;) I never said the US is as bad as Hitler's Germany, just that there are enough similar paths to make a comparison. I also disagree that the quote Larry used is only applicable in cases of millions of people being rounded up and killed. It is applicable in ANY case of people being deprived of their rights, more so when there is a demonstrable pattern of abuse. Is this more to your liking?

They came for the alcoholics,
But I didn't speak out, I'm not an alcoholic.
They came for the commies,
But I didn't speak out, I'm not a communist.
They came for the drug dealers,
But I didn't speak out, I'm not a drug dealer.
They came for the terrorists,
But I didn't speak out, I'm not a terrorist.
They came for me,
And there was nobody left to speak out.

I don't see Alcoholics rounded up and put in concentration camps awaiting the gas chamber.

Nor do I see the communists, even in the McCarthy era being rounded up. McCarthy wound up getting persecuted, more than he persecuted. Edward R. Murrow used the full force of the media to attack him with a misinformation campaign that has left a lack of understand of that era to this day. Most people have only heard one side of that story, thanks to all of Hollywood portraying him as the antichrist. He did make mistakes, but he also did some things right. To obtain a clear understanding one would have to read one book for McCarthy and another one against - something few have done.

Drug dealers are of course put in prison because the break the law. By the way, I am for the legalization of drugs.

As for the terrorists, I want authorities to come after them. I would not think that a nuclear bomb planed in Washington DC with potential to kill millions of people and destroy life as we know it to be something to sit back and do nothing about. This threat is about a hundred times as great as any problem cited by the group so far.

I didn't say we live in a tyrannical nation.

Then we basically agree on the major point under discussion. Why are we arguing?

I said we have many instances of tyranny here and are going down that path. Compared to Germany in the 40s, we're crawling down it, but there is forward progress down that path. I find that unacceptable.

The main ingredient that led to Nazi Germany was a strong tyrannical leader who was, of course, Hitler. If we go down the route that Germany did then we would need to have a Hitler as a leader. Where is he?